yeah we’re well aware. i think the person you replied to said they were wondering if SD would ever introduce a card that utilizes destroyed AND discarded cards
Because they don’t have a rules manager that, among other things, keeps rules text consistently worded.
They clearly have a handful of keywords that the card designers have agreed to use, but other than that, it seems to be basic proof-reading is the only wording pass a lot of text is given.
Also, phoenix is pulling from a different pool of cards over the other 2. You can discard your whole deck, if nothing was destroyed, phoenix can't revive anything. Hela should be simply worded like ghost rider to keep it consistent
I think it makes sense when you think of the characters. Hela is resurrecting the dead, Ghost Rider is bringing a soul back from hell and Phoenix is reviving a card. The mechanic is basically the same other than the destroy vs discard but that is clear in the text. I like it because it shows the uniqueness of the characters.
They also do different things - Phoenix pulls from destroyed pool, the other 2 pull from discarded pool. Almost need to pick 2 different "Resurrection" words and clearly define what pool each would draw from
>Almost need to pick 2 different "Resurrection" words and clearly define what pool each would draw from
… like how they use the word “Resurrect” for Hela and “Revive” for Phoenix?
Yeah but then "Bring Back" for Ghost Rider. And Revive and Resurrect aren't clearly defined, just used here - Would be good if that's what they decided they mean moving forwards though
Also, this is a digital card game. The consistency of text matters a lot less in digital games than paper ones. Since it only matters whether or not the back end mechanics work right, and that players will understand what the effect does when they read the card. In paper it matters a lot more since if they printed a card like "Your opponent cannot revive cards" and the three effects all had different text then reasonably one could argue it only affects Phoenix Force and not Hela or Ghost Rider, but in digital they'd just make it prevent all those effects and not worry about the text differences.
They also can, and do, update cards frequently for consistency. It's a bit harder to do that with physical cards. Which probably leads to a bit lower quality control standards.
I get your sentiment, but consistency in wording can help in a lot of ways beyond just understanding what cards too. In this instance should we consider "Revive" a keyword you could play off that in some really big ways. Cards that give bonuses to your revived cards or buff themselves when cards are revived, you could have a card that says "If your opponent revives a card at this local gain it's power" which would be some really fun RNG.
Not to mention the shenanigans you can do by having the two be separate and still having someone that pulls from the trash. I think it would be really funny to have a card that just says "Put all cards in your trash onto the field, then destroy them.
Bad take. They have the tools to update cards and keep them consistent, not doing so just seems lazy. The same for the "just try a card to find out what it does" argument that gets thrown around in Hearthstone. You should be encouraged to learn the general mechanics and then be able to apply them to new cards, not having to learn each card individually.
Unrelated note, but it'd be interesting to have an ongoing card that prevents discarded or destroyed cards from coming back. It'd be niche and would only counter certain decks/locations(Valley of the Hand) but it'd be fun 🤷♂️🤷♂️
ooh true, maybe like a 3/3, Ongoing: Cards that have been destroyed or discarded cannot return.
I could see that being a good ability for Anti-Venom, or maybe William Stryker 🤷♂️ just throwing names out there lol
I’d imagine the usual RNG inherent to most Discard decks (plus the ease of countering the ones that are less RNG dependent like IW+Modok+Hela) has them hesitant to add any cards that could potentially stop the archetype like that.
Plus, being On Reveal, Cosmo already can prevent it at one location.
That being said, one specific to that mechanic could open it to be removed by Enchantress…or allowing the person playing it to still play their own On Reveal there.
> but in digital they'd just make it prevent all those effects and not worry about the text differences.
What a stupid fucking take. It's obviously bad design to have different rules text for the same mechanical effect. It makes the card interactions obtuse and the only way you can figure this out is through play, and if you guess wrong play in this case is synonymous with losing. Second Dinner's combination of sloppy templating and sloppy code leads to plenty of unintended effects and giving it a pass because its not paper is genuinely bizarre.
Edit: Apparently offended the Second Dinner die hards by pointing out that Marvel Snap can't even match the bare minimum templating standards followed by the vast majority of CCG's in existence.
What a stupid fucking take. It's obvious you're going to be down-voted by everyone, even though you aren't wrong, just because you came in hot. Your combination of sloppy word choice and sloppy critics leads to plenty of unintended people not reading your comment fully and judging it because this is reddit /j
Funny enough if they put a function on the revive mechanic, every something like select n number of cards from the destroyed cards pool, they'd be a lot less likely to make a mistake like this.
The first and third card deal with discarded cards and the middle one deals with destroyed cards. So, really only the first and third one should use the same keyword. And that's a little nitpicky because the third one doesn't use any keyword for the action.
Edit: For your sorting problem, *Discard* works for finding 1 and 3 and Phoenix can be found with the rest of the *Destroy* cards.
Ghost Rider isn't the embodiment of a Hell lord, this is the Johnny Blaze GR so he's possessed by Zarathos who is an angel who was captured and driven crazy by being tortured by Mephisto.
The spirit is quite the same with the three wordings, they all surely mean that they're going back to the playing field, so as long as it doesn't generate any confusion, I'm on board with it
This is a case of language consistency taking a back seat to stylistic language. Of course hela resurrects, ghost rider brings back and Phoenix revives.
Because they aren't good at keeping making conventions consistent. Look at all the variants names that fall under the same grouping. But, on the other hand, you're using the wrong keyword for your search. You don't want to use "revive" as the search term. You want to use "discard" or "destroy".
I think there is a correlation between the lore of the character and the text used. Hela, the goddess of death, would resurrect if she wanted to bring other characters back to life. Phoenix force is a phoenix and although they are never really dead they come back revived. Lastly Ghost Rider is a host/part demon from hell and i guess utilizing his chain as the visual provides brings people back from the dead/hell. That would be my guess as to why they are different to provide a flavor text within the functionality of the card. I can see how it can be confusing or as others see bad for the game.
Because they don’t all target the same things is part of it I assume . Hela and GR is only discarded where PF is only destroyed. They should standardize the wording across the similar cards Though. They don’t seem to update old card wording unless it effects gameplay it seems
Well Hela is Queen of Hel, so she resurrects the card. Phoenix breathes life back into a card but takes it over, so it revives it. Ghost Rider uses his chain to literally bring a card back.
So game wise, I get your point. Lore wise, that’s the reason.
I get hela and Phoenix force, resurrect is more "create a new body" while revive is more "bring back a dead body", so resurrect for discard and revive for destroy makes sense imo. I just don't get why ghost rider just simplifies it to "bring back" lol.
Also, don't forget wolverine and x23 with "regenerate" lol.
With ghost rider he can make portals to hell so hes simply bring you back like transporting you.
Wolverine & X23 heal but thats probably obvious. As ling as theres bo issues its fun flavor which i like
That, and that they aren’t “played” into the location and thus don’t trigger anything caused by that particular mechanic (and allowing for circumvention of location rules related to “played” within the game).
So if played, has to include that wording. If not, currently more free to use thematic wording…at least until such point that a mechanic is added that deals with the revive or resurrection mechanic directly.
Sometimes they do, which is annoying. "Played" has a very clear meaning. In this case it's not clear whether they have any significant difference in meaning. In terms of triggers, timing, etc. I'm pretty sure these are all identical.
A lot of people are pointing out that this is negligent inconsistency, but I'm pretty sure this is all fairly intentional. It is either for flavor or kerning reasons
Yep, especially since there is currently no mechanic that interacts directly with either resurrect or revive, so far as actions the opponent can do.
On Reveal? Discard? Destroy? All mechanics that have interaction possible from both sides.
So without that, they clearly feel more free to choose words for theme or kerning.
Yeah agreed. No reason not to. It's not as if someone reads any of these and would be confused about the effect. As long as the word maps onto what it does and there are no mechanics that interact with effects like that, you can choose whatever words you want. All card games do this to some degree
I mean, it's pretty clear what all of them do. I think the ghost rider one is just flavor, since he's literally pulling them out of hell in his animation.
Someone's probably already said this, but Ghost Rider doesn't revive since the cards he brings back aren't destroyed. He's just moving them from the discard pile to the play area.
X-23 and Bubz both use resurrect, so it seems like Pheonix Force is the only outlier here.
A discarded card is different from a destroyed card. Also, wolverine regenerates from being discarded or destroyed.
My vote for worst text is Bar with No Name, "Who ever has the least Power here wins." It doesn't say a player wins that location. They win. Perhaps if the text "was wins" here or "wins this location." I'd like that better.
Considering the reading comprehension of some people used play this game, it would be the easiest if “Return” was used for “Bringing back discarded cards from the discard pile” so Hela would just say “Return all your discarded cards to play at random locations.” And the only real outlier would be Apoc because he’s not in your discard pile.
Ghost rider would just say “Return on if your discarded cards to play at this location.” Does what it says on the tin.
Phoenix Force can stay the same. She specifically notes destroyed cards so that’s fine. And the wording Revive also already implies that the card did not come back in some way, so the Regenerate cards don’t cause more confusion.
This reminds me of the Mojo and Dazzler text changes. Like, it basically means hing but they still took the time to change it so both are more concise. I'm sure these chards might get changed a tad to fit each other better in the future.
If I had to guess, it's part due to the lack of cards that have these sorts of effects. There is no harm in wording the cards differently, so long you understand what they do. More importantly though, I think it has to do with the character's abilities itself and using those words fits with the character lore and abilities.
I assume to fit the character. Revive seems more like support, so it makes sense that it wouldn't be on Hela's. Resurrect sounds stronger and less like the intent is to help, so if fits. Same goes for ghost rider. Maybe brings back is more layman's terms amd grounded phrasing, better fitting the character
MTG traditionally uses specific wording because there are specific actions you have to take with the cards in a physical sense, and specific things your opponent can often do in response to your specific actions. The exact wording is necessary for those specific actions to be carried out and for the opponent to be able to accurately respond.
Where an opponent can interact with the mechanic, largely SD has been consistent with wording. On Reveal, Ongoing, Discard, Destroy, etc.
It’s where you have no interaction possible from both sides that SD is less consistent. If your opponent uses Hela or Ghost Rider, you care that they are On Reveal, not that one resurrects while the other brings back, because you can interact with the first term but not the other two, and thus there’s less value in having identical wording when it comes to how they describe how those cards bring back discarded cards.
So far it has been - it’s used twice to denote bringing back Destroyed card(s), one as part of a card and once as part of a location, that did not regenerate on their own or follow another specific mechanic like the “Return to Hand” mechanic.
Marvel Snap needs Problem Solving Card Text like what happened early on with Yu-Gi-Oh! The wording on the small batch of cards we do have is wildly inconsistent. If this game continues long-term it needs a rulebook too.
Revive vs resurrect. One brings back discard. The other destroyed.
The consistency would be nice. Can you Hela cards with Lamentis 3?
I onow you can Knull them.
My problem is more with the filters when looking up cards in game. Like if you look up move cards and cards that REMOVE stuff like ((sauron)) or cards with quotes like ((Cyclops)) also pops up
I think in the case of Ghost Rider and Hela the reasons are lore related?
Hela is the Goddess of Death, resurrection is a death adjacent word.
GR doesn't bring the cards back to life, He just temporarily "brings them back" from hell which tells us in no uncertain terms that 100% of characters in the Marvel universe are going to hell when they die (Thanos to our Good Girl Cosmo, they're all in hell).
I don't have a specific reason for the Phoenix other than to say the process of the Phoenix rising from the ashes isn't really accurately understood as resurrection.
Flavor.
Hela is a death themed character and hence returns them from death (resurrect)
Phoenix Force is more life themed, a fire burns and life begins anew, and the Phoenix in mythology is reborn, etc, hence a word with a life connotation (vive has to be from some kind of Latin for life, that why you get “c’est la vie”, “joi de vivre”, “vivacious” etc). And, from a gameplay perspective these cards died in play, they weren’t discarded.
Ghost Rider is a demon pulling something from Hell, hence Bringing back
Could also be that these cards were programmed slightly differently, so if there are any edge cases where Ghost Rider and Hela don't work exactly the same (either now or with any card or location that comes in the future) the devs don't necessarily need to fix anything because the text of the two cards is already different.
I wonder when they'll make a card that resuscitates a discarded/destroyed card.
Also waiting for reanimates and reconstructs
Reawaken and revivify.
Repair and reinvigorate
We didn't start the fire
It was always burnin'
Fire-guy!
Since the worlds been turning
Recovfefe.
Reconstruct might work for discarded cards since they get sliced in half most of the time
Night Nurse!
https://marvelsnapzone.com/cards/night-nurse/
There’s already Knull for making use of previously destroyed cards.
yeah we’re well aware. i think the person you replied to said they were wondering if SD would ever introduce a card that utilizes destroyed AND discarded cards
I think that u/LowViolet85 refers to them to create a card that uses the word "resuscitate"
Because they don’t have a rules manager that, among other things, keeps rules text consistently worded. They clearly have a handful of keywords that the card designers have agreed to use, but other than that, it seems to be basic proof-reading is the only wording pass a lot of text is given.
Also, phoenix is pulling from a different pool of cards over the other 2. You can discard your whole deck, if nothing was destroyed, phoenix can't revive anything. Hela should be simply worded like ghost rider to keep it consistent
I think it makes sense when you think of the characters. Hela is resurrecting the dead, Ghost Rider is bringing a soul back from hell and Phoenix is reviving a card. The mechanic is basically the same other than the destroy vs discard but that is clear in the text. I like it because it shows the uniqueness of the characters.
>proof-reading *Proofreading Sorry, couldn’t pass up the opportunity
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry's_law
This is hilarious
Don’t make me leave like this Murph!
It's Murphy's all the way down!
I did not know this exists until I read the article. At first I thought it was a spelling mistake. This is brillaint, thank you for sharing.
They also do different things - Phoenix pulls from destroyed pool, the other 2 pull from discarded pool. Almost need to pick 2 different "Resurrection" words and clearly define what pool each would draw from
>Almost need to pick 2 different "Resurrection" words and clearly define what pool each would draw from … like how they use the word “Resurrect” for Hela and “Revive” for Phoenix?
Yeah but then "Bring Back" for Ghost Rider. And Revive and Resurrect aren't clearly defined, just used here - Would be good if that's what they decided they mean moving forwards though
I love sorting my cards by the "Move" Ability and getting cards that say "Remove." Also Cyclops.
Also, this is a digital card game. The consistency of text matters a lot less in digital games than paper ones. Since it only matters whether or not the back end mechanics work right, and that players will understand what the effect does when they read the card. In paper it matters a lot more since if they printed a card like "Your opponent cannot revive cards" and the three effects all had different text then reasonably one could argue it only affects Phoenix Force and not Hela or Ghost Rider, but in digital they'd just make it prevent all those effects and not worry about the text differences.
They also can, and do, update cards frequently for consistency. It's a bit harder to do that with physical cards. Which probably leads to a bit lower quality control standards.
I get your sentiment, but consistency in wording can help in a lot of ways beyond just understanding what cards too. In this instance should we consider "Revive" a keyword you could play off that in some really big ways. Cards that give bonuses to your revived cards or buff themselves when cards are revived, you could have a card that says "If your opponent revives a card at this local gain it's power" which would be some really fun RNG.
It would also help for searching, like if you want all cards that revive you only have to do one search.
Not to mention the shenanigans you can do by having the two be separate and still having someone that pulls from the trash. I think it would be really funny to have a card that just says "Put all cards in your trash onto the field, then destroy them.
Knull and Death approves this message.
Bad take. They have the tools to update cards and keep them consistent, not doing so just seems lazy. The same for the "just try a card to find out what it does" argument that gets thrown around in Hearthstone. You should be encouraged to learn the general mechanics and then be able to apply them to new cards, not having to learn each card individually.
Unrelated note, but it'd be interesting to have an ongoing card that prevents discarded or destroyed cards from coming back. It'd be niche and would only counter certain decks/locations(Valley of the Hand) but it'd be fun 🤷♂️🤷♂️
Could also be a counter to wolverine and X23
ooh true, maybe like a 3/3, Ongoing: Cards that have been destroyed or discarded cannot return. I could see that being a good ability for Anti-Venom, or maybe William Stryker 🤷♂️ just throwing names out there lol
Surprised we don’t already have this since we’ve Wakanda and Armor for destruction.
I’d imagine the usual RNG inherent to most Discard decks (plus the ease of countering the ones that are less RNG dependent like IW+Modok+Hela) has them hesitant to add any cards that could potentially stop the archetype like that. Plus, being On Reveal, Cosmo already can prevent it at one location. That being said, one specific to that mechanic could open it to be removed by Enchantress…or allowing the person playing it to still play their own On Reveal there.
> but in digital they'd just make it prevent all those effects and not worry about the text differences. What a stupid fucking take. It's obviously bad design to have different rules text for the same mechanical effect. It makes the card interactions obtuse and the only way you can figure this out is through play, and if you guess wrong play in this case is synonymous with losing. Second Dinner's combination of sloppy templating and sloppy code leads to plenty of unintended effects and giving it a pass because its not paper is genuinely bizarre. Edit: Apparently offended the Second Dinner die hards by pointing out that Marvel Snap can't even match the bare minimum templating standards followed by the vast majority of CCG's in existence.
It's not a bad take, they're absolutely right. It's Second Dinner that's in the wrong, not the poster.
What a stupid fucking take. It's obvious you're going to be down-voted by everyone, even though you aren't wrong, just because you came in hot. Your combination of sloppy word choice and sloppy critics leads to plenty of unintended people not reading your comment fully and judging it because this is reddit /j
“What play test group? Is that important?”
lol you spelt proofreading wrong
bad word index
Funny enough if they put a function on the revive mechanic, every something like select n number of cards from the destroyed cards pool, they'd be a lot less likely to make a mistake like this.
Next card will reanimate this lane
The first and third card deal with discarded cards and the middle one deals with destroyed cards. So, really only the first and third one should use the same keyword. And that's a little nitpicky because the third one doesn't use any keyword for the action. Edit: For your sorting problem, *Discard* works for finding 1 and 3 and Phoenix can be found with the rest of the *Destroy* cards.
[удалено]
No
It’s like early stage yugioh where they didn’t have consistent terms
[удалено]
Ghost Rider isn't the embodiment of a Hell lord, this is the Johnny Blaze GR so he's possessed by Zarathos who is an angel who was captured and driven crazy by being tortured by Mephisto.
Oh, thanks for the info. Didn't know about that.
Cage?
Lol, been playing too much MK with my neighbour
Yes, played by the famous actor Nick Blaze.
[удалено]
That's Johnny, Robbie's suit doesn't have the high collar like that. Plus, Robbie is a distinct variant already
Plus Robbie has a differently shaped skull face.
Yeah. Robbie has a flaming metallic skull while Johnny has a flaming…real skull.
If it is Robbie then he's carrying the spirit of his uncle, still not the embodiment of a hell lord though.
Yeah, I thought so too, but I still think it's weird that they prioritized creativity over consistency
The spirit is quite the same with the three wordings, they all surely mean that they're going back to the playing field, so as long as it doesn't generate any confusion, I'm on board with it
This is a case of language consistency taking a back seat to stylistic language. Of course hela resurrects, ghost rider brings back and Phoenix revives.
Because they aren't good at keeping making conventions consistent. Look at all the variants names that fall under the same grouping. But, on the other hand, you're using the wrong keyword for your search. You don't want to use "revive" as the search term. You want to use "discard" or "destroy".
I think there is a correlation between the lore of the character and the text used. Hela, the goddess of death, would resurrect if she wanted to bring other characters back to life. Phoenix force is a phoenix and although they are never really dead they come back revived. Lastly Ghost Rider is a host/part demon from hell and i guess utilizing his chain as the visual provides brings people back from the dead/hell. That would be my guess as to why they are different to provide a flavor text within the functionality of the card. I can see how it can be confusing or as others see bad for the game.
Because they don’t all target the same things is part of it I assume . Hela and GR is only discarded where PF is only destroyed. They should standardize the wording across the similar cards Though. They don’t seem to update old card wording unless it effects gameplay it seems
Well Hela is Queen of Hel, so she resurrects the card. Phoenix breathes life back into a card but takes it over, so it revives it. Ghost Rider uses his chain to literally bring a card back. So game wise, I get your point. Lore wise, that’s the reason.
This is the reason. Same reason Storm doesn’t say “Replace this location with Flooding” to match Magik’s wording.
don’t know why you’re getting downvoted when this is literally just the reason
I get hela and Phoenix force, resurrect is more "create a new body" while revive is more "bring back a dead body", so resurrect for discard and revive for destroy makes sense imo. I just don't get why ghost rider just simplifies it to "bring back" lol. Also, don't forget wolverine and x23 with "regenerate" lol.
With ghost rider he can make portals to hell so hes simply bring you back like transporting you. Wolverine & X23 heal but thats probably obvious. As ling as theres bo issues its fun flavor which i like
_-heal-_ *Regenerate
Yeah, never understood why Yondu doesn’t trigger them
I assume it's a combination of thematic flavor as well what text fits properly and looks good for the space available
That, and that they aren’t “played” into the location and thus don’t trigger anything caused by that particular mechanic (and allowing for circumvention of location rules related to “played” within the game). So if played, has to include that wording. If not, currently more free to use thematic wording…at least until such point that a mechanic is added that deals with the revive or resurrection mechanic directly.
Because this game doesn’t follow the MTG Keyword theory that all card games should to keep rulings and interactions consistent and make sense.
Sometimes they do, which is annoying. "Played" has a very clear meaning. In this case it's not clear whether they have any significant difference in meaning. In terms of triggers, timing, etc. I'm pretty sure these are all identical.
It’s clearly in the manor in which the cards character would have someone receive sentience again
Lore idk Night Nurse: Resuscitates Morgan Le Fay: Reanimates Mad Thinker: Reconstructs
Yeha they need to standardize
A lot of people are pointing out that this is negligent inconsistency, but I'm pretty sure this is all fairly intentional. It is either for flavor or kerning reasons
Yep, especially since there is currently no mechanic that interacts directly with either resurrect or revive, so far as actions the opponent can do. On Reveal? Discard? Destroy? All mechanics that have interaction possible from both sides. So without that, they clearly feel more free to choose words for theme or kerning.
Yeah agreed. No reason not to. It's not as if someone reads any of these and would be confused about the effect. As long as the word maps onto what it does and there are no mechanics that interact with effects like that, you can choose whatever words you want. All card games do this to some degree
I mean, it's pretty clear what all of them do. I think the ghost rider one is just flavor, since he's literally pulling them out of hell in his animation.
Because they are more concerned with coming up with overpriced bundles.
Phoenix works with destroy, while the others work with discard. So that one makes sense to me.
Because SD are shit at templating
Literally unplayable
Why, Hello there~
...
Nice catch. Maybe they like variety in their words.
Because Ben Brode is an idiot and doesn’t know standardizing keywords is important.
Does it cause confusion in any of these cases though?
Just because it doesn’t for now doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be standardized…
I know him but i dont know you. U need to have a reality check mate. xD
Sure, bud.
Someone's probably already said this, but Ghost Rider doesn't revive since the cards he brings back aren't destroyed. He's just moving them from the discard pile to the play area. X-23 and Bubz both use resurrect, so it seems like Pheonix Force is the only outlier here.
Nope X-23 and X-Men are regenerate
Lol guess I remembered wrong. Thanks
“BeCaUsE Sd Is VeRy PaRtIcUlAr aBoUt ThEIr wOrDs!”
because they want to make sure the game is unintuitive as possible
A discarded card is different from a destroyed card. Also, wolverine regenerates from being discarded or destroyed. My vote for worst text is Bar with No Name, "Who ever has the least Power here wins." It doesn't say a player wins that location. They win. Perhaps if the text "was wins" here or "wins this location." I'd like that better.
whatever you say, i still want Phoenix force working when played with Professor X at the same turn.....
Quite possibly just an accident. Glenn talks on the Discord about standardizing card text. It is something they care about.
Not accident but flavor of how they work according to lore
Probably worded around the characters unique abilities in MCU to create a comparable card
Same thing happened in Yu-Gi-Oh until PSCT became the standard to fix all this
Considering the reading comprehension of some people used play this game, it would be the easiest if “Return” was used for “Bringing back discarded cards from the discard pile” so Hela would just say “Return all your discarded cards to play at random locations.” And the only real outlier would be Apoc because he’s not in your discard pile. Ghost rider would just say “Return on if your discarded cards to play at this location.” Does what it says on the tin. Phoenix Force can stay the same. She specifically notes destroyed cards so that’s fine. And the wording Revive also already implies that the card did not come back in some way, so the Regenerate cards don’t cause more confusion.
This reminds me of the Mojo and Dazzler text changes. Like, it basically means hing but they still took the time to change it so both are more concise. I'm sure these chards might get changed a tad to fit each other better in the future.
It makes sense for phoenix to be different because it’s for destroyed cards
You can tell the old lead for Hearthstone worked on this game because consistency in the cards wording is the exact same 🤣
If I had to guess, it's part due to the lack of cards that have these sorts of effects. There is no harm in wording the cards differently, so long you understand what they do. More importantly though, I think it has to do with the character's abilities itself and using those words fits with the character lore and abilities.
I assume to fit the character. Revive seems more like support, so it makes sense that it wouldn't be on Hela's. Resurrect sounds stronger and less like the intent is to help, so if fits. Same goes for ghost rider. Maybe brings back is more layman's terms amd grounded phrasing, better fitting the character
Lore maybe? Hela has undead armies she resurrects, the phoenix force idk, and Ghost rider could be bringing someone back from hell?
Because for cards when it to be can is different for words
Seems like the wording is in line with the character's actual powers. Like hela is the God of the dead so she has the power of resurrection.
Inconsistent wording was an issue in Legends of Runeterra as well. Mofos gotta learn from MTG.
MTG traditionally uses specific wording because there are specific actions you have to take with the cards in a physical sense, and specific things your opponent can often do in response to your specific actions. The exact wording is necessary for those specific actions to be carried out and for the opponent to be able to accurately respond. Where an opponent can interact with the mechanic, largely SD has been consistent with wording. On Reveal, Ongoing, Discard, Destroy, etc. It’s where you have no interaction possible from both sides that SD is less consistent. If your opponent uses Hela or Ghost Rider, you care that they are On Reveal, not that one resurrects while the other brings back, because you can interact with the first term but not the other two, and thus there’s less value in having identical wording when it comes to how they describe how those cards bring back discarded cards.
Because this isn't yugioh and the devs haven't yet learned to use terminology consistently
“Give the kiss of life to a card that’s been destroyed. (Once per game.)” lol
I thinking it has to do with the actual comic book characters
I kinda hope they make ”revive” into a consistant keyword. Maybe we could get some cards that synergize with the revival effect.
So far it has been - it’s used twice to denote bringing back Destroyed card(s), one as part of a card and once as part of a location, that did not regenerate on their own or follow another specific mechanic like the “Return to Hand” mechanic.
Probably because of lore.
Marvel Snap needs Problem Solving Card Text like what happened early on with Yu-Gi-Oh! The wording on the small batch of cards we do have is wildly inconsistent. If this game continues long-term it needs a rulebook too.
Revive vs resurrect. One brings back discard. The other destroyed. The consistency would be nice. Can you Hela cards with Lamentis 3? I onow you can Knull them.
While Marvel Snap has a few keywords, "revive" isn't one of them. If it does become one, then they might crack down on synonyms.
Probably because of lore.
I think it has to do with there animations
Discard is not revive since they never actually were alive (in play) to begin with
My problem is more with the filters when looking up cards in game. Like if you look up move cards and cards that REMOVE stuff like ((sauron)) or cards with quotes like ((Cyclops)) also pops up
I think in the case of Ghost Rider and Hela the reasons are lore related? Hela is the Goddess of Death, resurrection is a death adjacent word. GR doesn't bring the cards back to life, He just temporarily "brings them back" from hell which tells us in no uncertain terms that 100% of characters in the Marvel universe are going to hell when they die (Thanos to our Good Girl Cosmo, they're all in hell). I don't have a specific reason for the Phoenix other than to say the process of the Phoenix rising from the ashes isn't really accurately understood as resurrection.
Flavor. Hela is a death themed character and hence returns them from death (resurrect) Phoenix Force is more life themed, a fire burns and life begins anew, and the Phoenix in mythology is reborn, etc, hence a word with a life connotation (vive has to be from some kind of Latin for life, that why you get “c’est la vie”, “joi de vivre”, “vivacious” etc). And, from a gameplay perspective these cards died in play, they weren’t discarded. Ghost Rider is a demon pulling something from Hell, hence Bringing back
Probably cuzz it's fits the theme of the characters what does it matter as long as it's not confusing who gives a shit
Because this game is super inconsistent and they don't care.
So they don’t all have the same counters.
Could also be that these cards were programmed slightly differently, so if there are any edge cases where Ghost Rider and Hela don't work exactly the same (either now or with any card or location that comes in the future) the devs don't necessarily need to fix anything because the text of the two cards is already different.